IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0301917.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Breaking the silence of sharing data in medical research

Author

Listed:
  • Henian Chen
  • Yayi Zhao
  • Biwei Cao
  • Donna J Petersen
  • Matthew J Valente
  • Weiliang Cen

Abstract

Data sharing is highly advocated in the scientific community, with numerous organizations, funding agencies, and journals promoting transparency and collaboration. However, limited research exists on actual data sharing practices. We conducted a comprehensive analysis of the intent to share individual participant data (IPD) in a total of 313,990 studies encompassing clinical trials and observational studies obtained from ClinicalTrials.gov, spanning the period from 2000 to 2023. Our study found that only 10.3% of principal investigators (PIs) expressed intent to share IPD. Clinical trials were more likely to share data than observational studies (odds ratio, OR = 1.98, 95% CI: 1.92–2.04). Large sample size studies were 1.69 times more likely to share data than small ones (95% CI: 1.65–1.73). Studies registered after 2018 were 1.6 times more likely to share data (95% CI: 1.57–1.64) than before 2019. NIH and other US Federal agency-funded studies had 1.49 times higher odds of sharing data (95% CI: 1.43–1.55) than other funders. USA-based studies were 1.53 times more likely to share data (95% CI: 1.49–1.57) than out of USA. Biological trials were 1.58 times more likely to share data than drug and other trials (95% CI: 1.51–1.66). Phase III trials had the highest odds, 2.47 times, of sharing data (95% CI: 2.38–2.56) than non-Phase III trials.

Suggested Citation

  • Henian Chen & Yayi Zhao & Biwei Cao & Donna J Petersen & Matthew J Valente & Weiliang Cen, 2024. "Breaking the silence of sharing data in medical research," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(5), pages 1-9, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0301917
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0301917
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0301917
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0301917&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0301917?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nosek, BA & Alter, G & Banks, GC & Borsboom, D & Bowman, SD & Breckler, SJ & Buck, S & Chambers, CD & Chin, G & Christensen, G & Contestabile, M & Dafoe, A & Eich, E & Freese, J & Glennerster, R & Gor, 2015. "Promoting an open research culture," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt7wh1000s, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Florian Jeserich & Constantin Klein & Benno Brinkhaus & Michael Teut, 2023. "Sense of coherence and religion/spirituality: A systematic review and meta-analysis based on a methodical classification of instruments measuring religion/spirituality," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(8), pages 1-43, August.
    2. Tom L. Dudda & Lars Hornuf, 2025. "The Perks and Perils of Machine Learning in Business and Economic Research," CESifo Working Paper Series 11721, CESifo.
    3. repec:plo:pbio00:1002456 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Wei Yu & Junpeng Chen & Sanhong Deng, 2024. "Open Science Under Debate: Disentangling the Interest on Twitter and Scholarly Research," SAGE Open, , vol. 14(3), pages 21582440241, August.
    5. Valérie Mignon & Marc Joëts, 2025. "Slaying the Undead: How Long Does It Take to Kill Zombie Papers?," Working Papers hal-04940088, HAL.
    6. repec:osf:osfxxx:em9ua_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. repec:osf:metaar:a8gu5_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Lohse, Johannes & Rahal, Rima-Maria & Schulte-Mecklenbeck, Michael & Sofianos, Andis & Wollbrant, Conny, 2024. "Investigations of decision processes at the intersection of psychology and economics," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    9. Oxley, Florence A.R. & Wilding, Kirsty & von Stumm, Sophie, 2024. "DNA and IQ: Big deal or much ado about nothing? – A meta-analysis," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    10. Chin, Jason & Zeiler, Kathryn, 2021. "Replicability in Empirical Legal Research," LawArchive 2b5k4_v1, Center for Open Science.
    11. David Moreau & Kristina Wiebels, 2024. "Nine quick tips for open meta-analyses," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(7), pages 1-14, July.
    12. Balafoutas, Loukas & Celse, Jeremy & Karakostas, Alexandros & Umashev, Nicholas, 2025. "Incentives and the replication crisis in social sciences: A critical review of open science practices," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    13. Vanessa Tabea von Kortzfleisch & Oliver Ambrée & Natasha A Karp & Neele Meyer & Janja Novak & Rupert Palme & Marianna Rosso & Chadi Touma & Hanno Würbel & Sylvia Kaiser & Norbert Sachser & S Helene Ri, 2022. "Do multiple experimenters improve the reproducibility of animal studies?," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(5), pages 1-21, May.
    14. repec:osf:metaar:qkjy4_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Mohammad S. Jalali & Elizabeth Beaulieu, 2024. "Strengthening a weak link: transparency of causal loop diagrams — current state and recommendations," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 40(4), October.
    16. Vogel, Dominik & Jacobsen, Christian Bøtcher, 2021. "Nonresponse bias in public leadership research: An empirical assessment," SocArXiv xshdw_v1, Center for Open Science.
    17. repec:osf:metaar:eqhjd_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Michael Gau & Anke Greif-Winzrieth & Alexander Maedche & Christof Weinhardt & Jan Brocke, 2025. "Engaging citizen scientists: designing an open research system for collaborative problem exploration," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 35(1), pages 1-16, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0301917. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.